Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Are there transitional fossils?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PsychoSarah" data-source="post: 71415908" data-attributes="member: 345531"><p>Total fish with lungs and the ability to walk on land, no one claimed Tiktaalik wasn't a fish. I'm not sure why you thought anyone would think that. </p><p></p><p><img src="https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/97/96/f8/9796f871f6e83b99ee354b260bf9f7ff.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> This is a recreation of an Australopithecus afarensis skeleton (the same species as the infamous Lucy fossil). Of the many transitional species relevant to our evolution specifically, this is the species we have the MOST fossils for, with over 1000 individual fossils. This one is Lucy <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/Lucy_blackbg.jpg" target="_blank">https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/Lucy_blackbg.jpg</a></p><p>And here are a few other ones:</p><p><a href="https://lawnchairanthropology.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/ksd-vp-1.jpg" target="_blank">https://lawnchairanthropology.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/ksd-vp-1.jpg</a></p><p><a href="https://australianmuseum.net.au/uploads/images/9363/dsc_0089_big.jpg" target="_blank">https://australianmuseum.net.au/uploads/images/9363/dsc_0089_big.jpg</a></p><p><a href="https://news.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/styles/leading_regular/public/images/image/20170519/selam-skeleton.jpg?itok=Aumc1tWq" target="_blank">https://news.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/styles/leading_regular/public/images/image/20170519/selam-skeleton.jpg?itok=Aumc1tWq</a></p><p></p><p>Oh yes, check out all these fossil hominids </p><p><a href="http://www.lifebeyondtourism.org/img/puntidiinteresse/site_0915_0002.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.lifebeyondtourism.org/img/puntidiinteresse/site_0915_0002.jpg</a></p><p></p><p>Addressing your comment that you think Lucy was a "knuckle dragger", the answer is definitively no. Not only was her pelvis an incorrect shape for that locomotion, but knuckle dragging apes have notably thick bones in the hands to support the body weight they put on their hands. The fingers of Lucy's species are too thin. A pelvis comparison <a href="http://anthro.palomar.edu/hominid/images/pelvis_and_feet.gif" target="_blank">http://anthro.palomar.edu/hominid/images/pelvis_and_feet.gif</a></p><p></p><p>Lucy, of course, was not human either. The rib cage shape is far more like a chimp than a human, the arms are too long, and the skull is fairly intermediate between human and chimp.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PsychoSarah, post: 71415908, member: 345531"] Total fish with lungs and the ability to walk on land, no one claimed Tiktaalik wasn't a fish. I'm not sure why you thought anyone would think that. [IMG]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/97/96/f8/9796f871f6e83b99ee354b260bf9f7ff.jpg[/IMG] This is a recreation of an Australopithecus afarensis skeleton (the same species as the infamous Lucy fossil). Of the many transitional species relevant to our evolution specifically, this is the species we have the MOST fossils for, with over 1000 individual fossils. This one is Lucy [URL]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/Lucy_blackbg.jpg[/URL] And here are a few other ones: [URL]https://lawnchairanthropology.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/ksd-vp-1.jpg[/URL] [URL]https://australianmuseum.net.au/uploads/images/9363/dsc_0089_big.jpg[/URL] [URL]https://news.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/styles/leading_regular/public/images/image/20170519/selam-skeleton.jpg?itok=Aumc1tWq[/URL] Oh yes, check out all these fossil hominids [URL]http://www.lifebeyondtourism.org/img/puntidiinteresse/site_0915_0002.jpg[/URL] Addressing your comment that you think Lucy was a "knuckle dragger", the answer is definitively no. Not only was her pelvis an incorrect shape for that locomotion, but knuckle dragging apes have notably thick bones in the hands to support the body weight they put on their hands. The fingers of Lucy's species are too thin. A pelvis comparison [URL]http://anthro.palomar.edu/hominid/images/pelvis_and_feet.gif[/URL] Lucy, of course, was not human either. The rib cage shape is far more like a chimp than a human, the arms are too long, and the skull is fairly intermediate between human and chimp. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Are there transitional fossils?
Top
Bottom